ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

August 30, 1973

OWENS-ILLINOIS, INC.

SHABBONA SAND PLANT,

Petitioner,

v.

)

PCB 73—237

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,

Respondent.

OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD (by Mr. Seaman):

Petition for variance was filed by Owens-Illinois, Inc. alleging

that Petitioner owns and operates a sand plant in Serena, Illinois,

as part of its Glass Container Division. The plant produces

two types of sand used for the manufacture of glass containers

and for other purposes. Sixteen people are employed at the plant.

The plant was originally constructed in 1965, but the equip-

ment used in the plant, including the dryer, was more than fifty

years old and in a bad state of repair. Petitioner purchased the

plant in January of 1971. Within the plant, the principal emis-

sion source is a direct rotary dryer for sand drying on a con-

tinuous basis, which emits silica sand dust and which is heavy

particulate matter. Presently, the dryer processes 90 tons of

sand per hour for sixteen hours each day, and emits approximately

623 pounds of particulate matter per hour.

Because of uncertainty as to what route to follow in updat-

ing its equipment, Petitioner was granted a 60 day extension of

the March 1, 1973 filing date for operating permit pursuant to

Rule 103(b) (2) (A) of the newly adopted Air Pollution Regulations.

Under Rule 203(a) of the Regulations, the dryer is permitted an

emission of only 28.02 pounds per hour and a control program

has been initiated.  At the present time, there is no control

equipment installed for abatement of particulate emissions, A

program for installation of a scrubber to control these emissions

at a total cost of $7,500 plus $3,500 installation charge has been

embarked upon as follows:

—

169

—2—

Date Activity Will Be

Completed

Date the applicant will apply    

Being submitted

for a construction permit for    

simultaneously with

this item of equipment or      

this variance petition

modification of equipment

Date the applicant will enter    

6/1/73

into a binding agreement to

purchase or modify this item

of equipment

Date this item of equipment     

10/1/73

will be delivered to the

applicant’s facility

Date construction or modifica-   

1/1/74

tion of equipment will be

completed

Date applicant will test equip-   

2/1/74

ment to demonstrate compliance

with the Environmental Pro-

tection Act and substantive

regulations promulgated there-

under

Date equipment will be fully    

3/1/74

operational

Computations based upon micron size of emissions of particles,

the configuration of the plant site and contingous property and

the prevailing wind have enabled Petitioner to compute that sub-

stantially all of the particulates will settle out before reaching

the nearest residence, most of which will settle on Petitioner’s

property. No complaints have been received from the neighbors.

Petitioner seeks a variance to March 1, 1974 from Rule 203(a)

(Particulate Emission Limitations for New Process Emission Sources),

Rule 203(i) (2) (December 31, 1973 Compliance Date), Rule 104 and

104 (b) (Compliance Program and Project Completion Schedule) 

and

Rule 114, presumably relating to the limitations presently

embodied in the Rules and Regulations Governing the Control of Air

Pollution.

9

—

170

—3—

The Agency recommends that the variance be granted subject

to certain conditions hereinafter specified. The Agency states

that the rotary dryer is presently in violation of Rule 3-3.111

of the Rules and Regulations Governing the Control of Air Pollu-

tion, which requires it to comply with the more stringent regula-

tions contained in Rule 203(a) of the newly adopted Regulations by

December 31, 1973. The present allowable standard under Rule

3—3.111 is 50.2 lb/hr, whereas Rule 203(a) will limit emissions

as above noted to 28.1 lb/hr effective December 31, 1973. The

Agency states that it believes the equipment will be effective

in bringing the Petitioner’s facility into compliance with Rule

203(a) and likewise believes that the time schedule proposed for

compliance is reasonable. It states that variances from Rules

104, 104(b) and 114 are unnecessary and inappropriate. However,

in view of the need to obtain an operating permit to

assure the plant’s continuing operation, we believe a variance

from Rule 104 is appropriate. The variance from Rule 114 is in

effect a request for variance of Rule 3—3.111 of the present Air

Rules. The Agency recommends that the variance of Rule 3-3.111

of the Rules and Regulations Governing the Control of Air Pollu-

tion (old rules) and Rules 203(a) and 203(i) (2) of the Air Pollution

Rules (new rules) be granted subject to the following conditions:

a) On August 1, 1973, November 1, 1973 and January 1, 1974,

Petitioner shall submit to the Agency progress reports

indicating progress made towards completion of the project.

b) Petitioner shall apply for and obtain all necessary permits

from the Agency.

c) Within thirty-five (35) days from the date of a Board Order

in this case, Petitioner shall submit a performance bond in

a form satisfactory to the Agency and in an amount deemed

appropriate by the Board to ensure compliance with this Order

and the Rules and Regulations.

d) Within thirty (30) days of the completion of this project,

Petitioner shall have performed a stack test. Petitioner

shall submit the results of the stack test to the Agency.

Within five (5) days of the date of said test, Petitioner

shall notify the Agency of the time and place of said test

and allow Agency observation if it is desired.

We grant the variance as requested subject to the terms and

conditions proposed by the Agency.

This Opinion constitutes the findings of fact and conclusions

of law of the Board.

—

171

—4—

IT IS THE ORDER of the Pollution Control Board that Petitioner,

Owens—Illinois, Inc. be granted a variance until March 1, 1974 from

Rule 3-3.111 of the Rules and Regulations Governing the Control of

Air Pollution and from Rules 104, 104(b), 114, 203(a) and 203(i) (2)

of Chapter 2: Air Pollution, Illinois Pollution Control Board kules

and Regulations to enable installation of a W. W. Sly scrubber for

control of particulate emissions at its Shabbona Sand Plant located

at Serena, Illinois subject to the following terms and conditions:

a) On November 1, 1973 and January 1, 1974, Petitioner shall

submit to the Agency progress reports indicating progress

made towards completion of the project.

b) Petitioner shall apply for and obtain all necessary permits

from the Agency.

c) Within thirty-five (35) days from the date o~this Order,

Petitioner shall submit a performance bond in the amount of

$11,000 in form satisfactory to the Agency to ensure the installa-

tion and operation of the aforementioned control equipment.

d) Within thirty (30) days of the completion of this project,

Petitioner shall have performed a stack test. Petitioner

shall submit the results of the stack test to the Agency.

Within five (5) days of the date of said test, Petitioner

shall notify the Agency of the time and place of said test

and allow Agency observation if it is desired.

I, Christan L. Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control

Board, certify that the above Opi ion and Order was adopted by the

Board on the 

day of 

____________,

1973, by a vote of 

to

9

—

172